Re: [HACKERS] Create Group

From: Peter Eisentraut <e99re41(at)DoCS(dot)UU(dot)SE>
To: Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at>
Cc: "'hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org'" <hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Create Group
Date: 1999-12-14 11:12:33
Message-ID: Pine.GSO.4.02A.9912141209160.24573-100000@Pingvin.DoCS.UU.SE
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, 14 Dec 1999, Zeugswetter Andreas SB wrote:

> > CREATE GROUP name [ WITH [ SYSID id ] [ USER name1, name2, ... ] ]
> > ALTER GROUP name WITH SYSID id /* changes sysid */
> > ALTER GROUP name ADD USER name1, name2, ...
> > ALTER GROUP name DROP USER name1, name2, ...
> > DROP GROUP name

> I think a group can be interpreted somehow like a priviledge.
> As such the statement to add or remove a user from a group
> would be a "grant" statement.

Not really, at least not in our context. A group is a collection
("group") of users which can collectively be granted privileges. For
example, you can do grant select on your_table to group staff (even right
now).

> The standard mutters something about "role"s
> (again haven't looked it up)
> I don't like the word role instead of group, but maybe if there
> is a standard we should use it.
>
> Informix and Oracle use the keyword role for groups,
> and use grant/revoke to administer them.

I suppose they have a slightly different underlying philosposhy then.
PostgreSQL already uses "group" all over the place, this is just a logical
extension which was missing.

--
Peter Eisentraut Sernanders vaeg 10:115
peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net 75262 Uppsala
http://yi.org/peter-e/ Sweden

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Zeugswetter Andreas SB 1999-12-14 11:16:24 AW: [HACKERS] Create Group
Previous Message Hiroshi Inoue 1999-12-14 10:50:23 Re: AW: [HACKERS] Volunteer: Large Tuples / Tuple chaining